By definition, the State of the Union address — sans the hyperbole of ovations and taunts from the bipolarly-opposed in the peanut gallery — is supposed to be about surveying the landscape and being “in the now.”

But that can be done with an eye on the future.

To that end, President Barack Obama did his job — and did it well — Tuesday night.

The biggest problem about a problem is not having a solution, and we heard solutions.

Advertisement

While the president may be all about his legacy, he seems to be focused on repairing the country’s motor — not just to pass inspection, but to be on the road for the long haul.

I have been doing a lot of thinking about the future myself lately, and it sent me on a journey through the past.

By way of a pamphlet handed out by a hippie forgotten by time outside a concert at the Tower Theater — don’t quote me, but I believe it was David Gilmour — my eyes were opened to global warming (not sure what, if any, label it had at the time).

While I tended to run from a discussion with my stepfather, a ninja debater, I sought him out on this one.

Perhaps, we would even be on the same side.

After all, we were breathing the same air.

Yeah, right.

He quickly countered that scientists would figure something out, adding that we had more immediate concerns as a society.

Taking out his favorite prop — a dollar bill — he said that money was all that mattered. He added that if we weren’t careful, China was going to take over.

It sounds like a familiar argument, with a conservative telling a liberal to get his or her head out of their you-know-what about the “myth” of climate change and worry more about the immediacy of the economy.

Except it is important to note that this took place back in like ... 1982?

Visionaries leaving from different ports for different destinations.

He liked to argue about issues, verbally. I liked to write about them — turning out notebooks filled with song lyrics before refining the art of the Sunday column for your pleasure, or displeasure, depending on which side of the fence you sit.

But really, in these bitterly divisive times, are we that different?

Me and him then?

Me and many of you now?

You and your neighbor with that lawn sign during election time that made you sick to your stomach?

Just like in 1982, when my Jew-Fro bellowed “‘scuse me while I kiss the sky,” most of us — not counting the growing number of reality-show zombies out there — are concerned about the future.

It’s just a matter of priority.

When I became a parent in 2007, some conservatives gleefully predicted that I would turn their way.

They said they couldn’t wait.

They can keep on waiting.

Let’s take the climate issue that had me so concerned back in the days of Loverboy and Luke and Laura.

An argument I hear from conservatives, other than it is a “myth” or part of some natural cycle, is that the earth’s man-made meltdown is so far down the road that it is not worth worrying about.

“What do I care? I’ll be dead anyway,” is a regular retort from the right.

That could mean two things:

•1) They are bored with the topic, so they are trying to end it by making a declarative “funny” (we all know that that’s not a right-wing strong suit).

•2) They really don’t care because, well, they’ll be dead anyway.

Maybe it’s the way I’m wired, but I just don’t get the selfishness.

I might be dead — no one here gets out alive — but what about my child?

And her children?

Her children’s children?

If we are never concerned about what we leave behind, why even live?

Then again, we can turn the record on the flip side and hear the song others sing.

I don’t like talking about the economy. I don’t profess to be an expert, other than any theory that says the rich need to get richer to make it all work is absurd.

Sure, I don’t want to be in debt to the likes of China, but those seem like the less immediate concerns when random acts of kindness are swallowed whole by unfathomable violence made easier to pull off by shoddy gun control laws and insane approaches to dealing with mental health.

I believe Obama touched on all these points — plus the dysfunctional higher education system that extorts money from anyone daring to get a college education to compete with countries putting us to shame on the world’s stage — and tried his best to do so in a healing, bipartisan way.

And with an eye toward the future.

I don’t know about you, but I see the State of the Union is a little bit better with him in charge.

Gordon Glantz is the managing editor of The Times Herald. Contact him at gglantz@timesherald.com or at 610-272-2500, ext. 212. Follow him on Twitter @Managing2Edit.